And, never state your hypothesis, we might comb through your results and point out embarrassing places where the data contradicts you.

This. Furthermore, the questions are primarily policy related, so they are especially meaningless. I may agree with you on climate change factually, but utterly disagree with you on what policies we should adopt regarding them. Of course "AAAS Members" don't agree with Joe and Jane Six-Pack, they don't work where they work, they don't live where they live, and so on and so on.

Sheesh. I wish Pew had done a better job here.

The days when a security breach is big news is so over. When the US Government can lose control over the employment records of every, single employee, this kind of playing around by Anonymous is just kind of sad.

Didn't the creators of Star Trek already explore this issue in depth? When machines can do all the work, money becomes obsolete. Wealth is measured in access to machines. Greed and avarice, of course, will still exist. "Hey! His replicator is bigger than mine! No fair!"

The parent comment is an excellent piece of analysis, but I want to comment on just one minor side point, which is that mailed-in ballots should be preferred over software-controlled ballots.

For the life of me, I cannot fathom why here, among the slashdot crowd of all places, is paper considered an ideal medium for counting anything. Do we not understand black-box testing? Do we not build in test assertions at every step, so that we can test our machine with another machine? Can we not imagine how horrific it would be that instead of automated tests, we printed out our assertions on a paper form, filled them in by hand, then hand-tallied the results after each build?

Now take all the issues with managing hand-written slips of paper, and magnify that by 2 because now you have to transport them by mail -- put them in an envelope (don't miss any!), put a stamp on it (don't forget!), pick them up and put them on a truck (did you get all of them?), etc., etc. Would you trust your critical data to a transport layer that didn't have guaranteed delivery? I thought not.

Humans stink at repetitive tasks, THAT'S WHY WHY WE INVENTED COMPUTERS. The ultimate repetitive task is counting, so let's use it, not go back to the Stone Age of paper.

A very hearty second. MuseScore has always been a very capable, easy-to-learn score editor. Looking over the new features, it looks like the developers are keeping that focus on functionality and usability, and aren't just larding on more stuff -- or even worse, ruining the app by changing the entire look and feel "just because". (Oh, how I hate the flat icon look. It actively makes it harder to see what you're doing. They have essentially made it impossible to classify things by sight, because you can't individuate anymore. Bah.)

I made the switch to MuseScore several years ago, and everything I've written down was done with this fine tool. Looking forward to 2.0.

Wow, who is making the argument that we should "sacrifice free speech for a better society"? That sounds positively Orwellian. Or something from China, where the government runs a massive censorship operation.

Liberal folks, this is your issue. The conservatives and libertarians are all over preserving the right to speech. Where is your support for the same? Speech is not action, it's just someone's opinion. Speech cannot hurt you, but the lack of freedom to speak most definitely can. You cannot "speak truth to power" if you cannot speak. What, no one remembers the Matrix?

https://sprout.hp.com/us/en/ This is what you need: a touch/draw surface for you to draw on, but overlaid with a video projection of what everyone else is drawing.

I don't understand this analysis. Why are you showing "profit" as being equal to gross for some stakeholders (Composers, writers, performers), but as only 5% of gross for others (labels and platforms)? And, furthermore, what's up with "estimating" the profit margin at a single number, and then applying that same number to two very different operations (labels vs. platforms)? That looks quite strange.

Hey, better be careful of what you wish for. A surprisingly large number of liberal causes depend on the principle of equal treatment. If you now have a law where it's OK to be unequal, that might open the door for others.

The President has sent his people out over the land, finding things that don't work very well. He will now spend the rest of his tenure urging various federal agencies and Congress to "stop doin' stupid stuff", accompanied, if possible, by some form of federal largess. Rinse. Relather. Repeat.

No, the scores of organizations are there because it is to their benefit to get out the vote, not because the process is hard.

When I say the process isn't hard, I mean it literally isn't hard because I have watched tens of thousands of ordinary people go through it with no problems. Shoot, even people with physical disabilities somehow manage to cast a vote.

The causes of low voter turnout are many, and difficulty with the voting process itself is not one of them, except for one factor: waiting time in the big, popular elections. Waiting time is not a factor in most elections. I am an officer of election, and have worked the polls for nearly a decade.

Despite all the hullabaloo, it is not, in fact, difficult to register to vote. It is not, in fact, difficult to show up at a polling station, check in, and cast your vote. There are scores of organizations that exist merely to help people with the process.

So, the whole rationale behind this BitCoin idea falls on its face.

"The hotel group found support from Cisco Systems. 'Unlicensed spectrum generally should be open and available to all who wish to make use of it, but access to unlicensed spectrum resources can and should be balanced against the need to protect networks, data and devices from security threats and potentially other limited network management concerns,' Mary Brown, Cisco’s director of government affairs, wrote.

While personal hotspots should be allowed in public places, the 'balance shifts in enterprise locations, where many entities use their Wi-Fi networks to convey company confidential information [and] trade secrets,' she added."

Why yes, the balance shifts in places like hotel conference centers, where many people use their own, personal hotspots precisely so they can better lock down confidential information. Please. This is a naked money grab. No more charging $thousands just for an Internet connection at a trade show.